DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
In the response filed 07/31/2026, the claims were amended.
These amendments are hereby entered.
In light of Applicant’s amendment to place claim 11 into independent form, the objection to claim 11 is withdrawn and claim 11 is allowed.
In light of Applicant’s amendments to the claims, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 of claims 1, 5-10, 12-15, and 17 as being unpatentable over Bae et al. (US 2020/0395558 A1), claim 16 as being unpatentable over Bae as applied above and further in view of Lin et al. (US 2020/0119289 A1), and claim 18 as being unpatentable over Bae as applied above and further in view of Xia et al. (US 2015/0214494 A1) are withdrawn by the Office.
Claims 1-18 were originally filed.
Claims 19-21 have been added.
Claims 2-4 are canceled.
Claims 1, 6-7, and 11 are instantly amended.
Claims 1 and 5-21 are pending in the application, of which claims 11 is allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 5-7, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Han et al. (US 2023/0232704 A1).
With respect to claims 1, 5, and 19, Han discloses compound 120 (page 35), which is pictured below.
PNG
media_image1.png
322
504
media_image1.png
Greyscale
This compound meets the requirements of instant Chemical Formula 1 when L1 is a substituted 5-membered N-heterocyclic carbene, Y is carbon, Z is nitrogen, X1 is NR4 wherein R4 is a C1 alkyl (methyl) group, X2 and X3 are CR3 wherein the two R3 are joined to form a condensed benzene ring, L2 is a 5-membered heteroaromatic ring (thiazole), X5 and X6 are both CR7 and the two R7 are joined to form a fused (benzene) ring structure, X7 is an sulfur atom, L3 is an unsubstituted heteroaromatic ring of 5 carbon atoms (pyridine), L4 is an unsubstituted aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), and T is an oxygen atom.
With respect to claims 6 and 7, Han teaches the compound of claim 1, and L2 has the structure of Structural Formula 12 when n is 2 and two R” are joined to form an aromatic hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms and W is sulfur, as pictured above.
With respect to claims 20 and 21, Han teaches the compound of claim 1, and L1 has the structure of Structural Formula 1 when R’ is a C1 alkyl (methyl), n is 2 and two R are joined to form an unsubstituted hydrocarbon ring of 6 carbon atoms (benzene), and forms Structural Formula 5, as pictured above.
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 10 and 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (US 2023/0232704 A1) as applied above.
With respect to claim 10, Han teaches the compound of claim 1, and Han also teaches that the compound may be substituted with deuterium (paragraph 0013, lines 1-3).
Such a modification produces a compound that meets the requirements of the instant claim when the compound comprises at least one deuterium atom.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to deuterate the compound, as taught by Han.
Han includes each element claimed, with the only difference between the claimed invention and Han being a lack of a deuterium atom being explicitly used. Absent a showing of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any known substituent from the finite list of possible substituents in order to arrive at the compound of the instant claim since the combination of elements would have yielded the predictable result of an organometallic compound which may improve the emission efficiency and device lifetime of an organic light emitting device comprising the compound (paragraph 0006), commensurate in scope with the claimed invention. See Section 2143 of the MPEP, rationales (A) and (E).
With respect to claims 12-14, Han teaches the compound of claim 1, and Han also teaches an organic light-emitting diode comprising a first electrode (an anode), a second electrode (a cathode), and an organic layer between the electrodes (paragraph 0008) which comprises a hole transport region, an emission layer, and an electron transport region (paragraph 0079), wherein the hole transport region comprises a hole transport layer (paragraph 0094, lines 1-4), the electron transport region comprises an electron transport layer (paragraph 0094, lines 5-6), and the emission layer comprises a host and the compound as a dopant (paragraphs 0011 and 0114) (paragraph 0209).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the compound as a dopant in the emission layer of a device with the claimed device structure, as taught by Han.
With respect to claims 15 and 16, Han teaches the diode of claim 14, and Han also teaches that the emission layer may further include a dopant material for emitting delayed fluorescence in addition to the organometallic compound (paragraph 0183, lines 1-6).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an additional dopant material with delayed fluorescence properties in the emission layer as taught by Han.
With respect to claim 17, Han teaches the diode of claim 13, and Han also teaches that the electron transport region may be formed using a vacuum deposition method (paragraph 0255, lines 1-3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form at least one layer using a deposition process, as taught by Han.
With respect to claim 18, Han teaches the diode of claim 12, and Han also teaches that the described light emitting device may be implemented in a light emitting display device (paragraph 0004) which has a flexible printed circuit film (paragraph 0374). This implies a flexible display device.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the device in a flexible display device, as taught by Han.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
With respect to claims 8 and 9, the claims are drawn to embodiments of instant Chemical Formula 1 wherein both of L3 and L4 are carbocyclic groups.
A search of the prior art did not identify the claimed invention.
The closest identified prior art is Han et al. (US 2023/0232704 A1).
With respect to claims 8 and 9, Han teaches tetradentate, platinum compounds which may comprise a coordinated imidazole-derived carbene with at least one additional condensed ring on the imidazole moiety, and at least one coordinated thiazole ring system which may be further condensed with a benzene ring (see for example compound 120 on page 35).
However, Han differs from the instant compounds of claims 8 and 9 because Han requires that a ring analogous to instant L3 is a pyridine ring.
Additionally, there existed no teaching nor motivation to remove the nitrogen atom in the broader prior art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 11 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With respect to claim 11, the claim contains 21 specific embodiments of tetradentate, platinum compounds which comprise a coordinated imidazole-derived carbene with at least one additional condensed ring on the imidazole moiety, and at least one coordinated oxazole or thiazole ring system which may be further condensed with a benzene ring.
A search of the prior art did not identify the claimed invention.
The closest identified prior art is Bae et al. (US 2020/0395558 A1).
With respect to claim 11, Bae teaches tetradentate, platinum compounds which may comprise a coordinated imidazole-derived carbene with at least one additional condensed ring on the imidazole moiety, and at least one coordinated oxazole or thiazole ring system which may be further condensed with a benzene ring (see for example the compounds on pages 45 and 54).
However, Bae differs from the instant compounds of claim 11 because Bae teaches that the organometallic compounds must comprise at least one cumyl group (abstract), and none of the compounds of instant claim 11 comprise a cumyl group.
Additionally, there existed no teaching nor motivation to remove the cumyl group in the broader prior art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL SIMBANA whose telephone number is (571)272-2657. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 A.M. - 4:30 P.M..
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571-272-7783. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RACHEL SIMBANA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
